Today was a long day

[conuly]

Two trips to Home Depot, geez.

Also, watched Sweeney Todd (the 2007 film) with the nieces and Jenn. I have now come to a conclusion as to which character in that play is most out of touch with reality. (It is, I think you'll agree, a tough call.)

Poll #21611

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 30

View Respondents

Which characters are most oblivious to reality?

View Answers

Sweeney Todd
1 (4.3%)

Mrs. Lovett
10 (43.5%)

Judge Turpin
1 (4.3%)

Beadle Bamford
0 (0.0%)

Johanna
3 (13.0%)

Anthony
1 (4.3%)

Pirelli
1 (4.3%)

Toby
4 (17.4%)

"The Beggar Woman"
2 (8.7%)

Which, if any, of the following characters recover from their ordeal?

View Answers

Johanna
8 (27.6%)

Toby
3 (10.3%)

Anthony
6 (20.7%)

The innocent pie-eaters
12 (41.4%)

None of the above
10 (34.5%)

Did the entire city of London lose their combs prior to the events of the 2007 adaptation?

View Answers

Evidently, poor things
13 (43.3%)

No, it's the fashion
3 (10.0%)

Their hair is the real crime
14 (46.7%)

is obviously Mrs. Lovett. Wake up and smell the melodrama, lady! This ain't some romantic comedy you're enacting!

*********************

African Painted Dog Pups Are Zoo Miami's First in 20 Years

Shifts in How Couples Meet, Online Takes the Top

New Colorado law will give state's electoral college votes to national popular vote winner

How 'This Land Is Your Land' Roamed And Rambled Into American Life

‘I wanted to make them a little book’: The knight and the book for his daughters

‘We spoke English to set ourselves apart’: how I rediscovered my mother tongue

Dutch join backlash at expensive drugs by making their own

The Moral Failings of American Press Coverage of Nazi Germany

Hated and hunted

Once sanctuaries, houses of worship struggle with security

Comments

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

I dunno. One could view Mrs. Lovett as the one most in touch with reality; it's just that reality for her is so grim and hopeless that turning to unabashed evil is the only way for her to get what she wants.

Judge Turpin and the Beadle had no compelling reason to be evil - they could have afforded to be as good in truth as they pretended to be - and they never even saw their doom coming at them, being blinded by their own arrogance. Lucy is obviously mad; Johanna is clueless if she doesn't know what Turpin plans for her; Anthony is clueless in general (they're well-matched.) Pirelli badly underestimated his rival, but it's Toby who was most out of touch with reality: in denial, apparently, because for the first time he was warm, well-treated, and had enough to eat. The clues of what was really going on were all around him, yet he never noticed till it was practically rubbed in his face.

Mrs. Lovett, though. She was circling the drain when Barker came back, trying to survive selling "the worst pies in London", and soon enough it would have been the workhouse or the street for her. Then the man she always wanted walks in her door - clearly barking mad, but at least he's there, and if he finds Lucy, she'll be alone again. So she knowingly chose to do evil to both of them for her own advantage.

Same with the pies. She's not mad like Barker, or obsessed with revenge; she just wants money, and has no qualms about killing, butchering and cooking people in order to get it. She doesn't hate those people; she just doesn't care about them any more than she'd care about pigs. I'd call her a sociopath, for sure, but sociopaths aren't necessarily out of touch with reality just because they don't acknowledge the social contract.

I don't think she ever 'loved' Barker. I think she wanted him, and was jealous of Lucy for having him, but after he came back, it was mostly just that she needed him, and not only to keep the 'long pig' coming for the pies. Mad or not, he was her only possible alternative to the sorry life of an impoverished woman alone. I think she knew very well that he was likely to kill her eventually, but men killed women a lot in the London slums, and the advantages of having a man outweighed the risk: better to get killed by your boyfriend at home, than by some brutal john in a muddy back alley.

Truly, when one thinks about the reality of women's lives in Victorian London, it's a wonder they didn't all go on mass-murder sprees. The Suffragettes (https://qz.com/535662/dont-be-fooled-by-suffragette-violence-alone-did-not-secure-the-womens-vote/) were certainly less violent in their protests than any male-led protest movement of that era, such as the Easter Rising. Anyway, I think Mrs. Lovett very clearly saw her only chance to get at least some of what she wanted for as long as she could make it last, and cold-heartedly threw everybody else under the bus for it, because to hell with them.

[conuly]

Lucy may be minimally functional, but she does at least seem to have a clear view of the situation around her as it unfolds. Mrs. Lovett, by contrast, thinks that dating a man who sings love songs to his knives and doesn't know she's dating him is a good idea. She's lucky he "just" killed her, it could've gone a lot worse.

Johanna certainly knew what was planned for her, or else why would even she be dumb enough to jump into a stranger's arms at the word go? (I do not have high opinions of her intelligence nor Anthony's, and so I agree that they're well-matched in that respect.)

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

We don't know that she thinks it's a good idea. Probably she knows perfectly well that it isn't, but who else is she going to date? Yeah, he's barking mad and sings love songs to his razors, but he's good-looking, well-dressed, has a respectable profession, and definitely brings home the 'bacon', and he doesn't beat her, rape her, or force her to prostitute herself. That's about as close to Prince Charming as Mrs. Lovett would ever get, and being evil herself, the fact that he's evil doesn't faze her.

"Johanna certainly knew what was planned for her, or else why would even she be dumb enough to jump into a stranger's arms at the word go?"

Well... why was Juliet dumb enough to jump into Romeo's arms, when he was not just a stranger, but the hereditary enemy of her House? "She was a girl, he was a boy; can I make it any more obvious?" - I don't think Johanna knew anything but that Anthony was young, handsome, and attracted to her, which is quite enough at that age. Had she suspected what the Judge was planning, surely she would have been making some plans of her own, like to poison his tea or stab him with a knitting needle or something.

Didn't seem like Lucy was more than minimally functional even before she got raped, and she never does realize that Sweeney Todd is her long-lost husband.

[conuly]

Probably she knows perfectly well that it isn't, but who else is she going to date?

Literally anybody else on the street.

Well... why was Juliet dumb enough to jump into Romeo's arms, when he was not just a stranger, but the hereditary enemy of her House?

She was three years younger than Johanna, with three years less to develop any sense.

Didn't seem like Lucy was more than minimally functional even before she got raped, and she never does realize that Sweeney Todd is her long-lost husband.

Yes, I don't want to blame the victim here but when she realized Turpin was having a party it ought to have been clear that he wasn't going to apologize and fix things, no matter how desperate she was to believe that.